Re: RSVP: Resolution to issue #29 satisfactory? (fwd)

Dan, IMO the spec should make clear that the Encoding can be used
everywhere it's suitable, and the RPC part can say we find the
Encoding suitable for RPC. 8-)

Our encoding (and data model, actually) are very much modelled
for the usual needs of RPC and by the usual data models of
programming environments, so probably RPC is the only major use
for SOAP Encoding, but I doubt it is the only use.

Best regards,


                   Jacek Kopecky

                   Senior Architect, Systinet (formerly Idoox)
                   http://www.systinet.com/



On Wed, 7 Nov 2001, Dan Brickley wrote:

 >
 > On Thu, 1 Nov 2001, Martin Gudgin wrote:
 >
 > > ----- Original Message -----
 > > From: "Dan Brickley" <danbri@w3.org>
 > > To: "Christopher Ferris" <chris.ferris@sun.com>
 > > Cc: "Jacek Kopecky" <jacek@systinet.com>; <bprice@us.ibm.com>;
 > > <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
 > > Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 3:16 PM
 > > Subject: Re: RSVP: Resolution to issue #29 satisfactory? (fwd)
 > >
 > >
 > > <SNIP>Long version</SNIP>
 > >
 > > > Short version: "what is SOAP-encoding for? what is it *not* for?"
 > >
 > > Dan,
 > >
 > > There are many people, myself included, that do not think that an encoding
 > > schema is necessary for many iteractions. Two parties just need to agree on
 > > what the XML is going to look like for a given exchange.
 > > This will probably be defined in a schema of some sort. There is no need for
 > > any 'standard' data encoding in many of these cases. In fact, I would go so
 > > far as to say we only need a 'standard' encoding for cases where two parties
 > > cannot agree by defining a schema.
 > >
 > > Martin
 >
 > So would you go so far as to say that SOAP Encoding is basically just
 > used for RPC? I've heard this from others offlist, but the 1.2 spec and WG
 > charter had given me the impression that it might be intended for wider use.
 >
 > Dan
 >

Received on Wednesday, 7 November 2001 11:28:41 UTC